PDA

View Full Version : #1 Pick Rumored to be Worth SIX 1st Rounders


holt_bruce81
12-24-2011, 05:37 PM
From Howard Balzer via twitter

HBalzer721 Howard Balzer
Hearing from sources that first pick in draft could be worth 6 No. 1 picks in a trade.
7 hours ago

PLease PLEASE PLEASE Blaine Gabbert suck it up next sunday and throw like six picks and help out your hometown team!

RaiderNation
12-24-2011, 05:41 PM
6 is a little crazy, Luck is an awesome prospect but he is not worth that. I'd give up maybe 2 or 3 1sts and a 2nd.

jsagan77
12-24-2011, 05:42 PM
Stupidest rumor ever?

holt_bruce81
12-24-2011, 05:44 PM
Stupidest rumor ever?

Eh, Howard Balzer has been doing this for a long time. It's not like him to just start spreading random rumors.

Plus you never know now with there being a Rookie salary cap.

CashmoneyDrew
12-24-2011, 05:56 PM
I'm not sure teams would trade 6 first rounders for Aaron Rodgers right now.

Complex
12-24-2011, 06:00 PM
Jay Glazer said over 5 1st round picks on Fox this morning only if RGIII goes back to school.

jsagan77
12-24-2011, 06:02 PM
Jay Glazer said over 5 1st round picks on Fox this morning only if RGIII goes back to school.


No he didn't. I watched that show and I never heard him say that.

TACKLE
12-24-2011, 06:09 PM
this made me laugh.

Complex
12-24-2011, 06:14 PM
No he didn't. I watched that show and I never heard him say that.

He did(10 char)

Borat
12-24-2011, 06:16 PM
It's actually worth 6 firsts and 1 bottle of three-pen1s wine.

Miaoww
12-24-2011, 06:31 PM
I don't care if Luck turns out to be as good as Cam Newton, I still wouldn't give up 6 first round picks for him. Any GM that does that should be fired immediately.

descendency
12-24-2011, 06:43 PM
Sources... The Colts and Rams GMs?

edit: I imagine that is 6 first rounders where most of them are late. Like basically 6 second rounders.

edit2: The last 6 first rounders in the draft are worth a combined value of 3790 points. But that value will certainly decrease as some if not most will be in future years. So this isn't as crazy as it sounds.

Mouse
12-24-2011, 07:15 PM
negotiation tactic

if a team doesn't give that up, then what? the rams or colts will have a 25 million dollar back-up? ...

FUNBUNCHER
12-24-2011, 08:03 PM
http://www.dictailgate.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/snyder-burning-money.jpg

Draft picks ain't nothin' but money.
Money's just paper!!

Let's start a fire, babee!!

PoopSandwich
12-24-2011, 08:18 PM
If anyone is dumb enough to give up 6 first round picks they deserve Luck to be the biggest bust ever.

jsagan77
12-24-2011, 08:26 PM
He did(10 char)

Falicy.......

A Perfect Score
12-24-2011, 09:32 PM
It's actually worth 6 firsts and 1 bottle of three-pen1s wine.

Stop, we were just playfighting.

You couldn't get 6 firsts for Aaron Rodgers, Greg Jennings and Jermichael Finley right now. Nobody is going to give it for Andrew Luck, I promise you that.

I'll be shocked if somebody gives up 3, honestly. Maybe a team like Cleveland, but that's the only way I see it happening.

descendency
12-24-2011, 10:30 PM
negotiation tactic

if a team doesn't give that up, then what? the rams or colts will have a 25 million dollar back-up? ...

The Rams will have a 50 million dollar 3rd year backup.

Shane P. Hallam
12-24-2011, 10:52 PM
6 is a bit much. I'd give up 2 1sts, 2 2nds, 2 3rds, and a player. Not quite 6 first rounders, but could be pretty close.

A Perfect Score
12-24-2011, 10:55 PM
6 is a bit much. I'd give up 2 1sts, 2 2nds, 2 3rds, and a player. Not quite 6 first rounders, but could be pretty close.

You'd give all of that for Andrew Luck? I've been riding the hype train since his SO season (I had him ranked higher then Locker and Mallet coming into that year, I remember arguing with Forenci about it haha) and even I wouldn't give nearly that. After all, he's just one player. He's a great QB prospect, but he isn't THAT much better then a Stafford or Bradford. Hell, I'm not convinced he's worth 2 first rounders more then RGIII at this point.

Bald_81
12-24-2011, 10:56 PM
Considering Palmer garnered pretty close to two 1sts, it's not a stretch to say Luck will grab three or four. Six? That's a little high. Although I certainly won't be complaining if we're the ones reaping the benefits.

Matthew Jones
12-24-2011, 10:56 PM
The first pick might fetch six first-round picks if Mike Ditka gets hired as a GM before the draft. Does anyone else think people are getting a little too worked up over someone who hasn't thrown a single pass in the NFL yet?

Xiomera
12-24-2011, 11:04 PM
That's the most laughable thing I've heard in a while (for a number of reasons).

Shane P. Hallam
12-24-2011, 11:31 PM
You'd give all of that for Andrew Luck?


If I didn't have a franchise QB and the chance at one, you bet.

LonghornsLegend
12-25-2011, 12:00 AM
Six first round picks? Yea right. Last time I checked Andrew Luck won't be the only good QB in the NFL, and I highly doubt he's good enough to destroy the league playing on a team with no talent around him. You can't expect to put your team in that situation for that long, what if injuries ruin his career?


Even if he is as good as advertised, he could battle injuries for all we know. That + six first round picks lost the next six years and your team could be trying to recover for the next 10 years. It puts an enormous amount of pressure on luck to step in and immediately produce like a Pro Bowler for the next 10 years.


Doesn't matter how bad his line is, WR's, or the play-calling, this hype is building him up to be an all-time great at this point and anything less that is going to be looked at like a regret.

Spectre
12-25-2011, 12:42 AM
If it was known for a fact that Andrew Luck would eventually become the next Peyton Manning, 6 1sts would still be tough to swallow. For an unproven college player is laughable no matter how much he's hyped. I think he'll fetch 3 1sts and MAYBE something else in addition but hell will freeze over before a GM gives up 6 for him. If he even remotely disappoints, that would = instant firing.

Scott Wright
12-25-2011, 12:47 AM
I don't know about five or six first round picks, but I've been on the record as saying there really isn't a prize I wouldn't pay for Andrew Luck. It's impossible to overpay for a stud quarterback.

prock
12-25-2011, 12:53 AM
I definitely would not give 6 first round picks for anybody. Three firsts and two seconds would probably be my max.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
12-25-2011, 12:57 AM
Stop, we were just playfighting.

You couldn't get 6 firsts for Aaron Rodgers, Greg Jennings and Jermichael Finley right now. Nobody is going to give it for Andrew Luck, I promise you that.

I'll be shocked if somebody gives up 3, honestly. Maybe a team like Cleveland, but that's the only way I see it happening.

Why not? Instead of getting 6 players who may or may not be good, you get 3 great players, including the #1 QB in the game right now. Heck, if my team is a QB away from contention, why wouldn't I trade 6 firsts for Aaron Rodgers?

LonghornsLegend
12-25-2011, 12:57 AM
Well then why not 15 first round picks, 1 for every All Pro team he'll make. I mean if it's impossible to over pay for a QB no price should bother a team. This is still an unproven prospect, that regardless of his potential needs a team around him to be able to win a SB.


Granted 1st round picks aren't the only way to acquire talent, but considering he'll already be on a bad team, not seeing the bonus in that. Can you imagine Andrew Luck playing in Jacksonville next year, without a 1st rounder for the next 6 years?


He is still a human after all, and when your talking about giving up this much for a guy you don't want to hear the excuses about no offensive line, or weapons to throw to. Obviously he's supposed to be above all that.

bengalbuck
12-25-2011, 09:28 AM
A lot of people in this thread are thinking like draft nerds and not GMs who are trying to win football games and championships. Stud QBs are by far the biggest factor in whether or not your team wins football games and championships.

Somebody says 6 1st rounders is too much for Aaron Rodgers, Jermichael Finley and Greg Jennings? Preposterous. Any GM that doesn't have a franchise QB who wouldn't give that bounty up for Rodgers is a fool and not doing his job. Are you telling me the Jets wouldn't be better with Rodgers in his prime for the next 6 years, but without those 1st rounders, than muddling through with a bunch of mid to late 1sts and crap QB play? You really think Ted Thompson would trade Rodgers for any package of picks?

Do you think any 6 1st round picks the Colts have made over the last 15 years are worth more wins to them than Peyton Manning?

I mean Julio Jones just went for 2 1sts, a 2nd a 3rd plus other picks at #6 (and other teams drafting higher turned that down) which is worth approximately 3 1st rounders. Isn't Luck obviously worth at least twice that? A once in a decade QB prospect vs. the 2nd best WR in his own class (in a QB-centric league)?

Anyway, I think for a team in the middle of the draft (i.e. Jets) who have a lot of pieces in place and can be players in FA, it absolutely makes sense to give up a bunch of 1st rounders if it gets them Andrew Luck. I think they have a better chance of winning a championship in the next decade with Luck but minus 5 future 1sts vs. sticking with Sanchez or reaching for Ryan Tannehill or somebody in this draft and keeping those future 1sts.


Note: I use the term "draft nerd" here in a derogatory sense because I think it is clouding people's judgment on players' "real" value to a football team, specifically the stud QB, as we are all enamored with the potential of draft picks. But in general, like most people here, I consider myself a "draft nerd" and usually think of that as a good thing, but it leads to some weird opinions I think.

tjsunstein
12-25-2011, 09:38 AM
I'm calling the bluff and watching to see if they draft Luck as a back up before I give them 6 firsts.

bengalbuck
12-25-2011, 09:40 AM
I'll expand on this post a tiny bit more with a little bit of insiderish info...I know for a fact that some of the smarter, more advanced franchises (that win a lot by the way) are tinkering around with statistics to try to determine player value in terms of wins and recruiting young guys out of top math and computer programs to help them with these evaluations. The concept is similar to the WAR (wins over replacement) metric that has become popular with baseball fans and GMs.

Anyway, they're finding that the "WAR" for elite QBs is astoundingly high compared to other positions because of the amount of close games and the amount of decisions/throws where the QB is the primary determinant of whether the play is a success or failure.

We're seeing this "math" play out on the field this season in Indianapolis which has provided a great case study and opportunity for these guys to try to compare numbers/concepts to things.

Long story short, it is not at all hard to believe that the numbers would bear out that a group of 6 randomly selected 1st round prospects would be worth less wins (over replacement level players at those positions) than an elite QB would.

When you factor in all the salary implications (cheap franchise QB for 5 years, not having to pay 6 1st rounders and putting that cash towards acquiring a couple elite FAs, etc.) as well, 6 1st rounders seems like a pretty reasonable price to pay.

But I suspect its a moot point anyway, because the Colts won't take even a massive 6 1st rounder offer as opposed to taking Luck unless they get some real proof that Peyton is going to be able to play at a high level for at least 3 years and they get much more than one 1st upfront this offseason.

bengalbuck
12-25-2011, 09:42 AM
I'm calling the bluff and watching to see if they draft Luck as a back up before I give them 6 firsts.

Out of curiosity, as a Packers fan, if you were GM, what offer of draft picks would it take for you to trade someone Aaron Rodgers this offseason?

Let's use the Jets as an example since they are the type of team that needs a QB, is in win now mode and is likely to have a mid-1st round pick...

tjsunstein
12-25-2011, 09:50 AM
Out of curiosity, as a Packers fan, if you were GM, what offer of draft picks would it take for you to trade someone Aaron Rodgers this offseason?

Let's use the Jets as an example since they are the type of team that needs a QB, is in win now mode and is likely to have a mid-1st round pick...
I wouldn't trade Aaron Rodgers for anything because there's simply no reason to. From what Rodgers has proven to be in this league, I can't imagine any offer would be entertained but a start would be upward of 3 top 10 picks. But any team getting Rodgers won't be drafting in the top 10 for long.

There's not a single offer I would accept for Rodgers consisting of just draft picks.

Plus when you use my favorite team and favorite player, who can be argued as the best in the league right now, it's hard to give an objective answer.

It's completely different when asking the price of Aaron Rodgers, when you know what you get, to Luck, who is still a prospect.

A Perfect Score
12-25-2011, 09:55 AM
What good does Andrew Luck do you if you can't draft a playmaker for him for the first SIX years of his career? I understand it's possible to find playmakers in later rounds, but more often then not the scouts get it right and the elite players go highly.

This is EXACTLY what's happening in Chicago right now. I applaud the Bears for pulling the trigger on the Jay Cutler deal, but they've been severely handicapped the past two seasons because that deal left them unable to surround Cutler with the type of talent he needs to succeed. Jay Cutler is a great QB: Hell, Jay Cutler is a much more physically able QB then Andrew Luck is. There's just no way around that. But the ROI the Bears have received on the Jay Cutler investment, to this point, have been fairly mediocre as he's been unable to succeed in an environment devoid of talent.

Andrew Luck is no different. It's nice to think you can mortgage that much, be it 6 first round picks or otherwise, and still be able to put together a competent offense. Spoiler alert? You can't.

You tell me what is more valuable to someone like the Cleveland Browns, Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin/Trent Richardson. Or RGIII/Michael Floyd. To me, the possibility of having an elite young QB and giving him a weapon to support his development will always, always, always trump the idea of trading 6 first round picks for Andrew Luck.

I'm sorry, but there is just no ******* way Luck is worth 5 firsts more then RGIII. Just no ******* way.

Prowler
12-25-2011, 10:31 AM
I can see the equivalent of 4 first rounders. Maybe 2 1st rounders with 1 being top 10 and then multiple 2nd, 3rd rounders, and a former 1st rounder or two. If Minnesota were to trade, then I'd expect Ponder, 1st rounder this year, 1st next year, couple 2nd and 3rds and maybe an Everson Griffin.

rawdawg
12-25-2011, 12:07 PM
Yeah, I'd give up a lot for Luck also. I was talking to a Dolphins fan, and he didn't want to do what it would take to get Luck.

If I'm the Dolphins, with a top 5 scoring D, a couple decent RBs, a 1000 yard WR, and franchise players at LT and C, I'd give up pretty much whatever it would take. It won't take 6 firsts. But I'd probably give up a 1, 2, 4 this year. A 1 and 3 next year and a 1st the year after if necessary. You'd have to think that the #1s in the future would be in the 20s, so not really giving up as much as it looks on the surface. And a team like the Dolphins at least has some players to put around Luck. To me, it's a no brainer if the Colts/Rams are interested in trading the pick away.

rawdawg
12-25-2011, 12:12 PM
What good does Andrew Luck do you if you can't draft a playmaker for him for the first SIX years of his career? I understand it's possible to find playmakers in later rounds, but more often then not the scouts get it right and the elite players go highly.

This is EXACTLY what's happening in Chicago right now. I applaud the Bears for pulling the trigger on the Jay Cutler deal, but they've been severely handicapped the past two seasons because that deal left them unable to surround Cutler with the type of talent he needs to succeed. Jay Cutler is a great QB: Hell, Jay Cutler is a much more physically able QB then Andrew Luck is. There's just no way around that. But the ROI the Bears have received on the Jay Cutler investment, to this point, have been fairly mediocre as he's been unable to succeed in an environment devoid of talent.

Andrew Luck is no different. It's nice to think you can mortgage that much, be it 6 first round picks or otherwise, and still be able to put together a competent offense. Spoiler alert? You can't.

You tell me what is more valuable to someone like the Cleveland Browns, Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin/Trent Richardson. Or RGIII/Michael Floyd. To me, the possibility of having an elite young QB and giving him a weapon to support his development will always, always, always trump the idea of trading 6 first round picks for Andrew Luck.

I'm sorry, but there is just no ******* way Luck is worth 5 firsts more then RGIII. Just no ******* way.

As a Bears fan, I don't think they've been hanidcapped. They've just been stupid. They had a full assortment of draft picks this year (minus the 7th used in the supplemental draft). They had the 3rd most money to spend this offseason. The problem hasn't been the lack of resources, but the misuse of them. The Gaines Adams trade gave up a 2nd, when they didn't have a 1st. They spent money on Roy Williams, instead of going after a good WR. They spent time trying to woo the has-been Olin Kreutz back to the team, and missed out on tons of OL help.

Basically my point is, if you are smart with your minimized resources and really put in the work in scouting, you can give whatever it takes for Luck and turn your franchise around.

dolphinfan2k5
12-25-2011, 12:16 PM
On a Dolphins board, there has been discussion (just discussing value) of trading Jake Long (two firsts), Brandon Marshall (one first), pick #7 (two firsts, see Julio Jones trade) and next year's first. So that is the equivalent of six first picks, depending on if you agree on the values. Worth it, or not? In my opinion, maybe, I haven't seen enough of Luck personally. I can see, or argue, both sides of the argument.

rawdawg
12-25-2011, 12:24 PM
On a Dolphins board, there has been discussion (just discussing value) of trading Jake Long (two firsts), Brandon Marshall (one first), pick #7 (two firsts, see Julio Jones trade) and next year's first. So that is the equivalent of six first picks, depending on if you agree on the values. Worth it, or not? In my opinion, maybe, I haven't seen enough of Luck personally. I can see, or argue, both sides of the argument.

I don't know about trading Long, but I'd give up Mike Pouncey instead and still make that deal. I'd probably give up Pouncey and Vontae Davis (instead of Long, still 2 firsts) and still make the deal.

DeathbyStat
12-25-2011, 12:27 PM
I bet the Dolphins and or the Redskins would do something this crazy


Maybe not six....but at least 4

dolphinfan2k5
12-25-2011, 12:31 PM
I don't know about trading Long, but I'd give up Mike Pouncey instead and still make that deal. I'd probably give up Pouncey and Vontae Davis (instead of Long, still 2 firsts) and still make the deal.

With all of Long's injury issues the last couple of seasons, and the fact that I believe he is a free agent next year, I might disagree with that. Pouncey has played very well this year. I don't think VD has that much value personally.

PhysicalwithanF
12-25-2011, 12:40 PM
6 picks....uhhh yaa right...the reported asking price when Luck's stock was at an all time high was 3 1st rounders...i doubt a team gets that at this point..two #1s and some second and thirds should do it.

FUNBUNCHER
12-25-2011, 12:48 PM
The question is, is Andrew Luck worth the opportunity cost of drafting another first round QB in case he busts?? That's what you're giving up by trading 6 1sts to draft him.

It's going to be really difficult to surround Luck with championship caliber talent if any team pays that kind of ransom.

Look at the Colts this season. As bad as they've been without Manning, Dallas Clark/Reggie Wayne/Dwight Freeney wouldn't be Colts under this scenario.(I think. Don't know the exact years when all of them were drafted).

You can build a championship caliber team with 2nd rounders, but it's much harder without the occasional 1st round talent thrown in the mix.
And you'd have to be a major player in the FA market.

At the end of the day, overall it would be so expensive down the road to pay six 1st round picks because of the moves your team would have to make to recoup value to your franchise in personnel.

EDIT:

If it's 'only' four 1st rounders, Luck is a SKIN.

Miaoww
12-25-2011, 12:53 PM
On a Dolphins board, there has been discussion (just discussing value) of trading Jake Long (two firsts), Brandon Marshall (one first), pick #7 (two firsts, see Julio Jones trade) and next year's first. So that is the equivalent of six first picks, depending on if you agree on the values. Worth it, or not? In my opinion, maybe, I haven't seen enough of Luck personally. I can see, or argue, both sides of the argument.

A good O-line can make a mediocre QB look good. I wouldn't touch Long if I was the Dolphins.

SchizophrenicBatman
12-25-2011, 12:57 PM
On a Dolphins board, there has been discussion (just discussing value) of trading Jake Long (two firsts), Brandon Marshall (one first), pick #7 (two firsts, see Julio Jones trade) and next year's first. So that is the equivalent of six first picks, depending on if you agree on the values. Worth it, or not? In my opinion, maybe, I haven't seen enough of Luck personally. I can see, or argue, both sides of the argument.

I would do that without hesitation. Marshall is replaceable, trading Long is a hit but I'd take it and you really only give up next year's first which on my best guess is probably in the 10-15 range. I wouldn't even think twice about that, tbh. I can't imagine a team with the #1 pick doing that though. Don't see why a team in that position would grade Marshall as worth a 5th rounder, much less a 1st

Now, the original proposition of Luck for 6 firsts? Absurd. That damages the chances of Luck succeeding much less the rest of your team. I think he's already walking into a massive turd of a situation in Indianapolis, but if you change that to Minnesota, Cleveland, Miami, etc without any first rounders to stock up on talent for the next 5-6 years? Forget about it

SchizophrenicBatman
12-25-2011, 12:58 PM
Think about it this way: Would you trade Jake Long for Matt Ryan, your first this year and your first next year? I absolutely would

Prowler
12-25-2011, 01:01 PM
Colts are a bad example. Mathis was a midround pick so that helps offset Freeney and Clark was easily enough replaced by Tamme. Manning was the only important player on that team.

LonghornsLegend
12-25-2011, 01:04 PM
Think about it this way: Would you trade Jake Long for Matt Ryan, your first this year and your first next year? I absolutely would

Why would you do that? You might get RGIII at their pick anyway, or at worst you trade a 2nd to move up and keep everything else. Or just take Tannehill and not trade anything.


We are getting way off hand here. Yes Matt Ryan is a good QB, but Andrew Luck is supposed to be something we haven't seen since John Elway. The Dolphins have chances to right now go after QB's just as good, or better then Matt Ryan is/was.



Also maybe I'm missing something but why is trading Jake Long the equivalent of two first? Or maybe I read that wrong..

dolphinfan2k5
12-25-2011, 01:27 PM
A good O-line can make a mediocre QB look good. I wouldn't touch Long if I was the Dolphins.

That has been the Dolphins strategy for about the last 5 years. It hasn't worked. And one guy doesn't make an offensive line good. It's 5 players that need to play as a unit, where continuity and scheme are very big factors for success.

I would do that without hesitation. Marshall is replaceable, trading Long is a hit but I'd take it and you really only give up next year's first which on my best guess is probably in the 10-15 range. I wouldn't even think twice about that, tbh. I can't imagine a team with the #1 pick doing that though. Don't see why a team in that position would grade Marshall as worth a 5th rounder, much less a 1st

Now, the original proposition of Luck for 6 firsts? Absurd. That damages the chances of Luck succeeding much less the rest of your team. I think he's already walking into a massive turd of a situation in Indianapolis, but if you change that to Minnesota, Cleveland, Miami, etc without any first rounders to stock up on talent for the next 5-6 years? Forget about it

If you wouldn't trade a 5th rounder for Brandon Marshall, you clearly have some misconceptions about him, or about the value of draft picks. That's absurd. A first might be a small stretch, but a 5th is just silly. I'd give a late first for Marshall and I'm not even a huge fan of his. I'm sure Bradford would love to have him. Don't let Miami's **** QB situation, or his overplayed drops, deceive you.

Think about it this way: Would you trade Jake Long for Matt Ryan, your first this year and your first next year? I absolutely would

No, that would not be a good trade.

We are getting way off hand here. Yes Matt Ryan is a good QB, but Andrew Luck is supposed to be something we haven't seen since John Elway. The Dolphins have chances to right now go after QB's just as good, or better then Matt Ryan is/was.

Also maybe I'm missing something but why is trading Jake Long the equivalent of two first? Or maybe I read that wrong..

Yeah, the hope is that he would be better than Matt Ryan.

What do you think Jake Long is worth? He is arguably the best left tackle in the game. At the minimum, he's top 3. That's worth more than one first rounder. Keep in mind that the values that I posted were in terms of late first rounders, as someone else suggested when they posted that the last 6 first round picks are a total of 3720 points, while #1 overall is 3000 points. And that's based on the old draft value chart before the rookie wage scale was implemented, which increases the value of higher picks. Anyway, Jake Long is worth at least two late first rounders. Look at it this way, would Jake Long go top five in this draft? Absolutely. And top five picks are worth at least two first round picks, as we saw last year with the Julio Jones trade.

WCH
12-25-2011, 01:36 PM
All year I was pretty firmly in the camp that said "Keep the pick and draft Luck, no matter what trade offers are out there, even if you're the Rams and have Bradford." Until the past few days, when this SIX (!!!) first round pick insanity emerged.

What, have all the GMs who remember the Herschel Walker trade already retired? That type of trade can turn a team into a dynasty, if they don't find a way to screw things up. I'm not a Sam Bradford fan, but I'd take my chances with Bradford and six extra first round picks.

And what if it's the Colts and Peyton can go for two more years? Again, I've been saying "Screw Peyton, draft Luck and set yourself up for the next 10 years." But if a team dumps an extra six first round picks into your lap then you could conceivably swing some trades and reload to make a run in Peyton's last two years. Especially if you trade with a team like Miami and a couple of those picks are immediately "converted" into guys like Jake Long and Brandon Marshall. Bill Polian is probably retiring with Peyton anyway, so how much does he really care about the future?

jsagan77
12-25-2011, 07:32 PM
I have no clue who started this "6 first rounder" nonsense, but it will never happen.

Shane P. Hallam
12-25-2011, 08:54 PM
I have no clue who started this "6 first rounder" nonsense, but it will never happen.

Of course it won't happen EXACTLY like that. But let's weigh the value, shall we?

6 first rounders at the 32nd pick = 3,540 points on the trade value chart.


Let's take the Browns, who would be in best position to give up the most picks for Luck. Right now, they have the 5th and 22nd 1st round pick, and I will keep consistent with that 5th for each round. Let's say they give up their first four picks:

3,255 points of trade value with the 5th, 22nd, 37th, and 69th picks.

A future 2nd is worth approx. 265 points (top 3rd round pick) which gives us 3,520 total.

Toss in a 6th round pick, and the total comes to:
3,545.5


So, in all the Browns would give up:
2 1sts
2 2nds (one future)
3rd
6th

and equal 6 first round picks. Is that completely insane for Luck? It equals 6 first rounders.




Let's look a bit lower and try the Chiefs at 12. To get to 3,540 points, we will have to be a bit more creative. We will use the current projection of 12th pick in each round

Current picks: 1,200 (first) + 460 (2nd) + 210 (3rd)

Future Picks 580 (first) + 265 (2nd) + 112 (3rd)

That is 2,827 points. Gives us a difference of 713, a late first round pick. Is Glenn Dorsey worth that much? You decide, but 2 firsts, 2 seconds, 2 thirds, and a player or two could easily equal 6 first round picks.

holt_bruce81
12-25-2011, 09:29 PM
Man has the value of draft picks changed over the years. I was looking back at the 1997 nfl draft to see what the Rams had to give up to move up to #1 overall and select one of the best Left Tackles ever to play College Football Orlando Pace.....

Jets get: Rams 1st round pick (6th overall) 3rd round pick, 4th round pick, 7th round pick

Rams receive: Jets 1st round pick (1st overall)

Steal.

nepg
12-25-2011, 09:42 PM
Falicy.......
Penisy even?

nepg
12-25-2011, 09:45 PM
Man has the value of draft picks changed over the years. I was looking back at the 1997 nfl draft to see what the Rams had to give up to move up to #1 overall and select one of the best Left Tackles ever to play College Football Orlando Pace.....

Jets get: Rams 1st round pick (6th overall) 3rd round pick, 4th round pick, 7th round pick

Rams receive: Jets 1st round pick (1st overall)

Steal.
The money... And the Jets are stupid... They traded Orlando Pace and Walter Jones in the same draft.

And I keep forgetting that David LaFleur was a first round pick :D

Prowler
12-25-2011, 09:51 PM
sometimes you just have to draft James Farrior instead of an all-world LT.

descendency
12-25-2011, 09:52 PM
I can't imagine a situation where the pick is traded and at least 1 good player isn't part of the deal.

Taking 5-6+ picks isn't really worth it when you lose out on the opportunity to get a dynamic playmaker right now.

Joe Thomas + a future first for Andrew Luck? Imagine how good the Rams OL would be then.

holt_bruce81
12-25-2011, 10:02 PM
I can't imagine a situation where the pick is traded and at least 1 good player isn't part of the deal.

Taking 5-6+ picks isn't really worth it when you lose out on the opportunity to get a dynamic playmaker right now.

Joe Thomas + a future first for Andrew Luck? Imagine how good the Rams OL would be then.

Oh man that would be awesome, but no way the Browns do that. And are you saying Joe Thomas and a 2013 first rounder? or Thomas and a 2012 forst rounder + future 1st rounder?

descendency
12-25-2011, 10:08 PM
Oh man that would be awesome, but no way the Browns do that. And are you saying Joe Thomas and a 2013 first rounder? or Thomas and a 2012 forst rounder + future 1st rounder?

I meant Thomas and 1 first rounder. getting Thomas and 2 firsts would be a steal, even for a franchise QB...

Flyboy
12-25-2011, 10:26 PM
With all this talk of STL holding Luck for ransom, I still think there's a possibility that they could draft him (granted they are in the position to do so) and then trade Bradford... depending on the FO and the coaching staff. Luck would come cheaper than Bradford and I think he'll end up being a much better QB than Bradford (Bradford's rookie year didn't really impress me all that much)..but I'm in the small minority that believes so.

energizerbunny
12-26-2011, 02:24 AM
A good O-line can make a mediocre QB look good.

This is statement I would of agreed with 5 years ago, but my ideology has been shifted quite a bit since then.

What a good Oline does is create slightly more time for your QB to throw.

However if your QB does not process information quickly and is able to go through his reads fast enough in that given time it is useless time that he is not taking advantage of. In the NFL the entire game (and biggest difference between HS->College->Pro) is anticipation, if you can't anticipate where the windows will develop it does not matter how much time you have, because in the NFL you need to THROW your WRs open.

A good example of this would be Mark Sanchez, who by all accounts has had one of the best offensive lines infront of him his entire career, however still cannot process information quick enough to take advantage of this.


The anti-thesis would be a Great QB behind a suspect OLine, I'll use the Peyton Manning example, since he has never really played behind a top unit.

There are many ways you can scheme to help your oline out, 30 game, screens, moving the launch point, play action pass game and making quick decision check downs when you do face pressure in the 50 & 70 pass games.

If you want to see an example of this watch how the Packers have adjusted with their banged up Offensive line.



Just so this does not get too far away from the topic, you'd be better off (and would average far more PPG) trading 5 1st rounders for a Franchise QB, rather then using those all 5 1st rounders all on Offensive Lineman (even if a majority of them are pro bowl calibre).

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
12-26-2011, 09:34 AM
At first i wanted to say how stupid this idea is but then I remembered these 6 1st rounders(or equivalent) should be coming to the colts. Carry on.

JBCX
12-26-2011, 10:23 AM
At first i wanted to say how stupid this idea is but then I remembered these 6 1st rounders(or equivalent) should be coming to the colts. Carry on.

Not if they beat the Jaguars this week, which is highly possible.

armageddon
12-26-2011, 11:15 AM
With all this talk of STL holding Luck for ransom, I still think there's a possibility that they could draft him (granted they are in the position to do so) and then trade Bradford... depending on the FO and the coaching staff. Luck would come cheaper than Bradford and I think he'll end up being a much better QB than Bradford (Bradford's rookie year didn't really impress me all that much)..but I'm in the small minority that believes so.


If the Rams trade Bradford, the rest of his bonus money would all be due this coming year. Something like 30 mill cap hit. Not very likey they trade him because of this. btw, the Rams have something like 50 million of cap room for 2013, the most in the NFL.

Larry
12-26-2011, 11:38 AM
Stupidest rumor ever?

definitely a ridiculous rumor.

thebow305
12-26-2011, 11:45 AM
6 is a bit much. I'd give up 2 1sts, 2 2nds, 2 3rds, and a player. Not quite 6 first rounders, but could be pretty close.

I would do this as well, but probably not much more. As for the player, I'd probably try to offer Jared Odrick and see if they bite. Nice young defensive lineman on a team that needs them badly. He's a former 1st rounder who has played very well this year in a rotation.

Iamcanadian
12-26-2011, 01:46 PM
6 is a bit much. I'd give up 2 1sts, 2 2nds, 2 3rds, and a player. Not quite 6 first rounders, but could be pretty close.

I agree that this is a far more likely scenario but I have heard 3 firsts plus other picks mentioned occasionally since Luck is definitely special. 6 first rounders is absolutely ridiculous.

dolphinfan2k5
12-26-2011, 01:50 PM
definitely a ridiculous rumor.

I don't understand how you can think it's ridiculous with some of the valuation posts in this thread. It's a little high, and obviously no one would give up 6 actual first rounders. But the first post said it could be worth that amount, which as some have suggested, is not actually that high when you think about it.

whatadai
12-26-2011, 02:05 PM
Of course it won't happen EXACTLY like that. But let's weigh the value, shall we?

6 first rounders at the 32nd pick = 3,540 points on the trade value chart.


Let's take the Browns, who would be in best position to give up the most picks for Luck. Right now, they have the 5th and 22nd 1st round pick, and I will keep consistent with that 5th for each round. Let's say they give up their first four picks:

3,255 points of trade value with the 5th, 22nd, 37th, and 69th picks.

A future 2nd is worth approx. 265 points (top 3rd round pick) which gives us 3,520 total.

Toss in a 6th round pick, and the total comes to:
3,545.5


So, in all the Browns would give up:
2 1sts
2 2nds (one future)
3rd
6th

and equal 6 first round picks. Is that completely insane for Luck? It equals 6 first rounders.




Let's look a bit lower and try the Chiefs at 12. To get to 3,540 points, we will have to be a bit more creative. We will use the current projection of 12th pick in each round

Current picks: 1,200 (first) + 460 (2nd) + 210 (3rd)

Future Picks 580 (first) + 265 (2nd) + 112 (3rd)

That is 2,827 points. Gives us a difference of 713, a late first round pick. Is Glenn Dorsey worth that much? You decide, but 2 firsts, 2 seconds, 2 thirds, and a player or two could easily equal 6 first round picks.

I don't trust the draft pick point value system. It wasn't so great before and it's very off now after the rookie salary cap.

TheSlinger
12-26-2011, 02:12 PM
I don't trust the draft pick point value system. It wasn't so great before and it's very off now after the rookie salary cap.

Actually the reason it was off was because the top-10 salaries got so out of whack. Now with the new CBA, the chart should be more accurate.

Saints-Tigers
12-26-2011, 03:14 PM
It's off because the depth and talent in every draft is extremely different.

You can't assign value to picks across different drafts.

I think you can determine the value of a top 15 pick, or the first pick, or pick 26, or whatever else, but to use the same chart yearly is asinine, IMO.

TitanHope
12-26-2011, 05:12 PM
Normally, I'm a proponent of, "If you see a guy you think can be a franchise QB for you, and you like him, then it's worth the price," but I'm not giving up much more than two 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd or two. Jay Cutler was a Pro Bowl QB, and the Bears traded two 1sts, a 3rd, and Kyle Orton for him. And the Broncos even had to toss in a 5th RD'er with Cutler to seal the deal. Cutler was only 25 years old too. (PS. Your trade still looks silly, Atlanta. WAY TO GO!)

If, say, assassins murdered all the QB's in the NCAA this offseason, and it was going to be 4 years until another QB came along, then sure, give up 6 1st RD picks for him. But it's not like Andrew Luck is a team's only opportunity for a franchise QB. And while I understand the "If you don't have a franchise QB, your #1 goal should be acquiring one" mantra, I don't think it's that black and white in this situation. Trade a 2nd RD pick to move up in the 1st for a guy you like like Jacksonville did last year, and I agree it's totally the right move (Although hindsight suggests it was a stupid decision, but at the time, who didn't like it? OK! RHETORICAL QUESTION!).

But you're talking about severely mortgaging the future for a chance of getting a franchise QB. But, you'll always have chances at these guys. The Panthers, Titans, Jags, Vikes, and Bengals did so last year, and next year you'll have a chance at one with Barkley, Wilson, and maybe Braysed God. I know the sooner the better, but I'd be able to stomach waiting a year knowing I'll have premium selections to fix the supporting cast.

This may be overthinking it, but this is a case where you're not only putting all your eggs in one basket, but you're climbing into the basket yourself. The only way you make that megatrade is if you ask yourself, "Could Andrew Luck conceivably fail to become an elite QB in the NFL?" Barring catastrophic injury, if his success chance percentage isn't significantly better than past QB's prospects a team has analyzed, then I'm not sure you should make the trade. But if you're batting .500 on 1st RD'ers having success, are having success with your midround picks, you have a solid team right now, and you think Luck is a can't miss prospect that makes you a Super Bowl contender for the next decade, go ahead. But then again, I'm not sure you should trust a scouting department that's telling you to draft Luck if it's failing as many times as it's succeeding. Such a picky pick to trade.

sbh15
12-26-2011, 05:23 PM
I'm not sure teams would trade 6 first rounders for Aaron Rodgers right now.

i'd do it without hesitation. you're still working with 6 other picks every draft and if you scout well enough and know what to do in free agency you can manage. it's significantly easier to build a team once you have the league's best qb

Caulibflower
12-26-2011, 07:20 PM
If a team has any confidence at all in their ability to evaluate talent, giving up 6 first round picks ought to feel like giving up six chances to draft a pro bowl player. Don't care who's available at the top of a draft, I'm not giving up six first round picks. That is patently absurd.

jsagan77
12-26-2011, 07:39 PM
I don't understand how you can think it's ridiculous with some of the valuation posts in this thread. It's a little high, and obviously no one would give up 6 actual first rounders. But the first post said it could be worth that amount, which as some have suggested, is not actually that high when you think about it.

Because it's ******** and Jay Glazer never said that. I watched the show and he never said anything about 6 picks.

fenikz
12-26-2011, 07:44 PM
I would entirely give up 6 1sts for Aaron Rodgers

jsagan77
12-26-2011, 07:51 PM
I would entirely give up 6 1sts for Aaron Rodgers

I would too and I'd also do it for Brady/Peyton in his prime, but I wouldn't give it up for any of them on draft day w/o knowing if they'd pan out or not. No matter how good a prospect is, there's still a bust factor and unless two or 3 of those picks were conditional on him making the pro bowl or reaching certain escalators I couldn't imagine a deal like this ever being made.

Santonio10
12-26-2011, 08:07 PM
I have done a lot of research on the value of draft picks. The first overall pick is worth 5 times as much as the average draft pick. With the first overall pick you can expect a player of Corey Dillon and Rodney Harrison caliber. A player who will go first overall can be expected to go to a couple pro bowls

jsagan77
12-26-2011, 08:10 PM
I have done a lot of research on the value of draft picks. The first overall pick is worth 5 times as much as the average draft pick. With the first overall pick you can expect a player of Corey Dillon and Rodney Harrison caliber. A player who will go first overall can be expected to go to a couple pro bowls


It's inflated value wise, but the quality of the pick isn't necessarily a 100% bonafide stud and that variance is the problem.

Iamcanadian
12-26-2011, 10:02 PM
Of course it won't happen EXACTLY like that. But let's weigh the value, shall we?

6 first rounders at the 32nd pick = 3,540 points on the trade value chart.


Let's take the Browns, who would be in best position to give up the most picks for Luck. Right now, they have the 5th and 22nd 1st round pick, and I will keep consistent with that 5th for each round. Let's say they give up their first four picks:

3,255 points of trade value with the 5th, 22nd, 37th, and 69th picks.

A future 2nd is worth approx. 265 points (top 3rd round pick) which gives us 3,520 total.

Toss in a 6th round pick, and the total comes to:
3,545.5


So, in all the Browns would give up:
2 1sts
2 2nds (one future)
3rd
6th

and equal 6 first round picks. Is that completely insane for Luck? It equals 6 first rounders.




Let's look a bit lower and try the Chiefs at 12. To get to 3,540 points, we will have to be a bit more creative. We will use the current projection of 12th pick in each round

Current picks: 1,200 (first) + 460 (2nd) + 210 (3rd)

Future Picks 580 (first) + 265 (2nd) + 112 (3rd)

That is 2,827 points. Gives us a difference of 713, a late first round pick. Is Glenn Dorsey worth that much? You decide, but 2 firsts, 2 seconds, 2 thirds, and a player or two could easily equal 6 first round picks.

Works well except of course the Colts or the Rams whichever, will expect the trade to be with a top 5 team and will calculate the trade value thus if they expect 6 firsts:
So let's take the Cleveland Browns, the trading team would probably accept the 5th and 22nd picks of round 1 = 2,480 points + the Brown's 1st round pick for the next 4 years which they would calculate as 4 x 1700 = 6,800 for a grand total of 9,280 points. Any other team drafting lower would have to match this price and it just isn't ever going to happen.
No team drafting in the top 5 is going to pay that much, your math may make it look like the value of 6 firsts but the reality is totally different.
Anybody who thinks the Colts or Rams would trade out of the top 5 teams in this weak draft, is just fooling with #'s.

Shane P. Hallam
12-26-2011, 10:20 PM
Works well except of course the Colts or the Rams whichever, will expect the trade to be with a top 5 team and will calculate the trade value thus if they expect 6 firsts.

Not true, that isn't how teams calculate value of future picks.

Iamcanadian
12-26-2011, 10:41 PM
Not true, that isn't how teams calculate value of future picks.

I would be interested to see your source???

dolphinfan2k5
12-26-2011, 11:09 PM
How bout every other year when teams trade future firsts for second round picks? It's common knowledge that future picks are not as valuable. The Patriots take massive advantage of this widely-held belief.

Shane P. Hallam
12-26-2011, 11:13 PM
I would be interested to see your source???

Watching the NFL Draft.

A Perfect Score
12-26-2011, 11:20 PM
Normally, I'm a proponent of, "If you see a guy you think can be a franchise QB for you, and you like him, then it's worth the price," but I'm not giving up much more than two 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd or two. Jay Cutler was a Pro Bowl QB, and the Bears traded two 1sts, a 3rd, and Kyle Orton for him. And the Broncos even had to toss in a 5th RD'er with Cutler to seal the deal. Cutler was only 25 years old too. (PS. Your trade still looks silly, Atlanta. WAY TO GO!)

If, say, assassins murdered all the QB's in the NCAA this offseason, and it was going to be 4 years until another QB came along, then sure, give up 6 1st RD picks for him. But it's not like Andrew Luck is a team's only opportunity for a franchise QB. And while I understand the "If you don't have a franchise QB, your #1 goal should be acquiring one" mantra, I don't think it's that black and white in this situation. Trade a 2nd RD pick to move up in the 1st for a guy you like like Jacksonville did last year, and I agree it's totally the right move (Although hindsight suggests it was a stupid decision, but at the time, who didn't like it? OK! RHETORICAL QUESTION!).

But you're talking about severely mortgaging the future for a chance of getting a franchise QB. But, you'll always have chances at these guys. The Panthers, Titans, Jags, Vikes, and Bengals did so last year, and next year you'll have a chance at one with Barkley, Wilson, and maybe Braysed God. I know the sooner the better, but I'd be able to stomach waiting a year knowing I'll have premium selections to fix the supporting cast.

This may be overthinking it, but this is a case where you're not only putting all your eggs in one basket, but you're climbing into the basket yourself. The only way you make that megatrade is if you ask yourself, "Could Andrew Luck conceivably fail to become an elite QB in the NFL?" Barring catastrophic injury, if his success chance percentage isn't significantly better than past QB's prospects a team has analyzed, then I'm not sure you should make the trade. But if you're batting .500 on 1st RD'ers having success, are having success with your midround picks, you have a solid team right now, and you think Luck is a can't miss prospect that makes you a Super Bowl contender for the next decade, go ahead. But then again, I'm not sure you should trust a scouting department that's telling you to draft Luck if it's failing as many times as it's succeeding. Such a picky pick to trade.

Oh hey, look at that...logic. I rarely see you around these forums, sir. I always assume you're off associating with your friends, Reason and Common Sense.

ellsy82
12-26-2011, 11:54 PM
Hmmm. I'm not saying Luck isn't the second coming of Rodgers/Brady/Manning. However, all of this hype brings back a LOT of memories of when Ryan Leaf came out. Just throwing my two cents out there.

If he IS worth six first round picks, its been oblivious to me. He's a top notch blue chip QB prospect coming out of a competitive division with lots of starting experience. And if he is worth all that, why haven't more teams entered the "suck for Luck" sweepstakes. Just makes me a bit squeamish.

Iamcanadian
12-27-2011, 01:07 AM
Watching the NFL Draft.

And that told you that they use the 32nd pick in round one to establish value in a multi pick trade.

While I doubt, the team holding Luck's pick would expect to get 9,200 plus points for his rights, I don't think they would calculate using your formula either. I suspect they would be looking for around 7,000 in value for such a trade if they expected 6 first rounders.

I suspect they would cut the difference say in Cleveland's case to the average of the 5th and 22nd pick to calculate the 7,000 points. No doubt, there would have to be an awful lot of haggling to settle on figures between the trading teams but I cannot see either the Colts or the Rams just accepting the #'s you are suggesting, but in truth, I have no real way of knowing. If you are right, you have certainly learned more from the draft than I.

Babylon
12-27-2011, 02:00 PM
Hmmm. I'm not saying Luck isn't the second coming of Rodgers/Brady/Manning. However, all of this hype brings back a LOT of memories of when Ryan Leaf came out. Just throwing my two cents out there.

If he IS worth six first round picks, its been oblivious to me. He's a top notch blue chip QB prospect coming out of a competitive division with lots of starting experience. And if he is worth all that, why haven't more teams entered the "suck for Luck" sweepstakes. Just makes me a bit squeamish.

First off he's more mobile than Leaf, reads coverages better and obviously has greater character and is more coachable. And yes those of us in the northwest new Leaf was volatile.

As for more teams sucking for luck, players and coaches dont go out there to lose football games and besides there has been a good deal of sucking going on around the league this year.

dolphinfan2k5
12-27-2011, 02:20 PM
And that told you that they use the 32nd pick in round one to establish value in a multi pick trade.

While I doubt, the team holding Luck's pick would expect to get 9,200 plus points for his rights, I don't think they would calculate using your formula either. I suspect they would be looking for around 7,000 in value for such a trade if they expected 6 first rounders.

I suspect they would cut the difference say in Cleveland's case to the average of the 5th and 22nd pick to calculate the 7,000 points. No doubt, there would have to be an awful lot of haggling to settle on figures between the trading teams but I cannot see either the Colts or the Rams just accepting the #'s you are suggesting, but in truth, I have no real way of knowing. If you are right, you have certainly learned more from the draft than I.

How is your speculation any more valid? You are just picking a random number based on what you think. What Shane and others are doing is calculating the minimum value that "6 first rounders" could be do determine the minimum that would need to be traded to make this rumor plausible. Makes a hell of a lot more sense than picking numbers you think sound right and ending your analysis saying they expect 7000 points.

Santonio10
12-27-2011, 04:19 PM
It's inflated value wise, but the quality of the pick isn't necessarily a 100% bonafide stud and that variance is the problem.

I was talking about expected values. You are correct however. The variance is the issue with any draft pick. Hopefully wherever a player is selected, he outperforms his expected value

ellsy82
12-27-2011, 07:09 PM
First off he's more mobile than Leaf, reads coverages better and obviously has greater character and is more coachable. And yes those of us in the northwest new Leaf was volatile.

As for more teams sucking for luck, players and coaches dont go out there to lose football games and besides there has been a good deal of sucking going on around the league this year.

Wasn't comparing them as football players, Babs. Just saying, that's the level of hype (Manning/Leaf).

Shane P. Hallam
12-27-2011, 07:10 PM
How is your speculation any more valid? You are just picking a random number based on what you think. What Shane and others are doing is calculating the minimum value that "6 first rounders" could be do determine the minimum that would need to be traded to make this rumor plausible. Makes a hell of a lot more sense than picking numbers you think sound right and ending your analysis saying they expect 7000 points.

And in general a 1st rounder on the future is considered a 2nd rounder value. So, I used the Top 2nd round pick as the value, which is actually the max value this would bring.

PossibleCabbage
12-28-2011, 03:12 PM
I would entirely give up 6 1sts for Aaron Rodgers

And if you called the Packers and said "we'll give you our next 6 first round picks for Aaron Rodgers" they would respond with "not enough."

K Train
12-28-2011, 03:14 PM
And if you called the Packers and said "we'll give you our next 6 first round picks for Aaron Rodgers" they would respond with "not enough."

i think they would be more than willing to give up rodgers for 6 then roll with flynn for a year and have to use one of there dozen first round picks over the next 6 years on a franchise QB if need be

LonghornsLegend
12-28-2011, 03:48 PM
i think they would be more than willing to give up rodgers for 6 then roll with flynn for a year and have to use one of there dozen first round picks over the next 6 years on a franchise QB if need be

ahahahahahhahahahahahaha. The funniest part was when you said "more then willing".

K Train
12-28-2011, 03:53 PM
idk 6 might be too much to pass up....thats really an unheard of offer. at the very least they could bundle up a few picks and trade for an unhappy QB ala cutler.

having 12 first round picks and 6 second round picks in 6 years really gives you leverage to make any move you want....not like you are throwing your franchise down a toilet.

not like it would ever happen though

PossibleCabbage
12-28-2011, 03:56 PM
i think they would be more than willing to give up rodgers for 6 then roll with flynn for a year and have to use one of there dozen first round picks over the next 6 years on a franchise QB if need be

The Packers have a young (28) Quarterback who is demonstrably elite, a good citizen, a high-calibre leader, and is on an incredibly team friendly contract (2012: $8 million, 2013: $9.25 million, 2014: $10.5 million). Moreover, he's especially valuable to the Packers because the core of the team is young, just like he is.

He is, no joke, probably the single most valuable player in the entire NFL in terms of what he could garner in a trade.

Saying "you'd trade Aaron Rodgers for six 1s" is saying "I'd trade any player in the NFL for six 1s." But, as Shane is pointing out, "six 1s" is potentially only 3540 points by the chart. Many players are worth more than 3540 points.

K Train
12-28-2011, 04:03 PM
6 first round picks is SO MUCH though....im not advocating that someone offer it and im not saying the packers should be shopping him around for it but damn if they get 2 superbowl wins from their 2005 pick at QB by the time hes 29 id consider that a hell of a return on investment and maybe just MAYBE the idea of having premium players at just about every position for the next 12 years might be enticing. aaron rodgers is dominant, a master of the position, but the packers arent uncompetitive without him.

maybe more than willing was a little hasty, but it would have to at least be considered

also if aaron rodgers were unhappy with his deal and the packers wouldnt budge on it, hed probably warrant the going rate of 2 first round picks (probably up it to 3) but the only reason 6 wouldnt be enough is because rodgers is very happy in GB...just another aspect to think of, this scenerio as is would be a team calling green bay randomly and making an ridiculous offer which really just doesnt happen

K Train
12-28-2011, 04:04 PM
6 1sts aren't as valuable as aaron rodgers right now. period.

despite kinda arguing, im not really disagreeing with this...it would be just such a huge deal that weve never seen before

what would you think andrew lucks value is though? idk if you said this already but im curious....id say probably 3 1sts, a handful of 2/3/4s and a cornerstone player (like a DE, LT....ect)

Saints-Tigers
12-28-2011, 04:24 PM
Maybe 6 top 5 picks, or 6 1st overall picks...

ellsy82
12-28-2011, 05:11 PM
I'd tell you this much...I'd love to be the team that gives up that first overall pick in exchange for 6 first round picks. Oooohh...starting to get turned on.

Give up that pick, move back halfway through the first round, and draft a QB then. That's a lot of ammunition heading into the upcoming years' drafts.